CU Buffs Football Archives - On One Hand Business... On the Other Hand Sports

CU Buffs Football Attendance Up in 2015

November 28, 2015December 21, 2015 horvath Leave a comment

The hard cold facts about college football are that every Saturday half the teams are losers. And the CU Buffs are doing their best to make their opponents feel good about themselves on the weekends.

Over the past decade the abysmal win-loss record of the CU Buffs football team has given fans a reason to find other things to do on Saturday afternoons than support the black and gold.

The problems began over a decade ago. The Buffs finished the 2004 and 2005 seasons with 7-5 records. In 2004 they were 4-4 in the Big 12 and in 2005 they were 5-3. Oklahoma beat them 42-3 in the 2004 Big 12 Championships and Texas thumped them 70-3 the following year.

Many viewed these drubbings in the championships as a sign that CU was not capable of participating in the D1 football race to see which program could spend the most money. The CU administration viewed the losses differently. They used them as justification for hiring a new coach.

In retrospect, those days of getting slaughtered in the Big 12 championships were the good old days. The Buffs football team has not had a winning season since 2005.

In 2011, dollar signs flashed in front of the CU administrators and CU jumped from the Big 12 to the PAC-12 conference. Unfortunately the Buffs found out the PAC-12 also had teams that knew how to play football.

Since 2011, the Buffs have had five conference wins – three on the road and two at home. Details follow:

Year	Conference Record	Comments
2011	2-7 conference record	Home win over Arizona and a road win against Utah.
2012	1-8 conference record	Road win over Washington State.
2013	1-8 conference record	Home win over California.
2014	0-9 conference record	Ugh!
2015	1-8 conference record	17-13 squeaker in Corvallis

Unfortunately, the Buffs conference home attendance has paralleled the number of wins on the field.

2011
The Buffs were 1-4 at home in conference play.
• 9/10 49,532 California
• 10/1 51,928 Washington State
• 10/22 52,123 Oregon
• 11/4 50,083 Southern California
• 11/22 48,111 Arizona.
Average conference home attendance 50,355.

2012
The Buffs were 0-5 at home in conference play.
• 9/29 46,893 UCLA
• 10/11 45,161 Arizona State
• 10/27 44,138 Stanford
• 11/17 43,148 Washington
• 11/23 46,052 Utah.
Average conference home attendance 45,078.

2013
The Buffs were 1-3 at home in conference play.
• 10/5 45,944 Oregon
• 10/26 38,679 Arizona
• 11/16 38,252 California
• 11/23 36,005 Southern California.
Average conference home attendance 39,720.

2014
The Buffs were 0-5 at home in conference play.
• 9/13 38,547 Arizona State
• 10/04 36,415 Oregon State
• 10/24 37,442 UCLA
• 11/1 35,633 Washington
• 11/29 39,155 Utah
Fewer than 40,000 people attended every home game and average conference home attendance was 37,438.

2015
The Buffs were 0-5 at home in conference play.
10/3 46,222 Oregon
10/17 39,666 Arizona
10/31 51,508 UCLA
11/13 37,905 USC
11/28 45,823 Utah
The downward trend in attendance has been reversed. Average home attendance for the 2015 home conference games was 42,225 and Buffs fans were usually treated to a good show. Even though they were 0-5, they lost the five home games by a total of only 37 points.

Buff fans have to be the most loyal in the country. Despite going 2-22 at home since joining the PAC-12, they still keep showing up. Here’s to a better 2016! The CU Athletic Department needs fans in the seats to provide better funding for the Olympic sports.

Buffs Waiting for a Bowl Berth?

November 18, 2015December 21, 2015 horvath Leave a comment

On November 16th the Daily Camera sports department ran an article titled, “Buffs Clinging to Dim Hope for a Bowl Berth.” Excerpts from the article follow.

A whopping 80 bowl game spots are available this year. Of the 128 teams in the FBS, 62 teams have already earned bowl eligibility, while 34 have no chance of getting to the magic number of six wins.

Among the other 32 teams, 18 are just a win away from the six-win mark.

That leaves 14 other long shots that haven’t had good seasons to this point, yet still cling to hope.

Colorado is among the 14.

CU’s hope, however, stems from the fact that there might actually be a shortage of bowl eligible teams this season. If that’s the case, a 6-7 CU team could slip in through the back door and go bowling.

With all due respect to the players, coaches, and program – the Buffs don’t deserve a bid to a bowl. The team made progress this season, but they are a losing program that finds new and exciting ways to continuing being a losing program. It is actually sad.

At this point in the season the Buffs are 4-7. They started off the season 3-1, with wins over Massachusetts (2-8), CSU (5-5), Nicholls State (2-8), and Oregon State (2-8). Combined these four teams have won only 11 games while losing 29. Ouch!

The story gets worse.
• Massachusetts had wins over Eastern Michigan (1-9) and FIU (5-6) – total 6-15.
• CSU beat Savannah State (1-8), University of Texas San Antonio (2-8), Air Force (7-3), Wyoming (1-9), and UNLV (3-7) – total 14-39.
• Nicholls State beat Lamar (5-5) and Houston Baptist (2-8) – total 7-13.
• Oregon State beat Weber State (5-5) and San Jose State (4-6) – total 9-11.
These four schools won 11 games. Only one of their opponents had a winning season (CSU beat Air Force). The combined record of these programs was 36-78.

In other words, CU was only able to beat teams that were capable of defeating only really weak programs.

This season will cap off a decade of losing seasons, although things were only slightly better in 2005 when they were 7-6. In the past nine seasons the Buffs were 31-79.

Here’s to a better season in 2016. The athletic program need a winning football team to generate more revenue to provide greater support for the minor sports.

CU Football – Charting a Path to Effective Leadership

August 8, 2015August 11, 2015 horvath Leave a comment

Since CU football began in 1890, the Buffs have had an impressive run, 673–452–36. During these 125+ years, Buff fans have been treated to the athleticism and leadership of athletes such as Dick and Bobby Anderson, Cliff Branch, Tom Brookshier, Darian Hagan, and Whizzer White.

Unfortunately, the Buffs have fallen on lean times for the past nine years, including two years under Coach MacIntyre. During this period the team was 31-79 overall and 16-60 in conference play. In the two seasons under Coach MacIntyre the team was only 6-18; however, those close to the program are quick to point out they have high expectations for the team because they believe his record does not reflect the team’s improvement.

Since taking over MacIntryre has addressed a myriad of issues ranging from recruiting to academics to facilities. Recent team updates in the local media have highlighted MacIntyre’s experiment to strengthen leadership within the program.

He has announced that each game he will rotate four captains from a 12-person leadership council. The council members are primarily upperclassmen and a mix of offensive and defensive players. MacIntyre emphasized that council members were “carefully” elected by the players. Council members have the responsibility/privilege of attending leadership meetings conducted by the Athletic Department in addition to the regularly scheduled council meetings.

In addition, MacIntyre has made a concerted effort to inform the entire team about the importance of effective leadership and the qualities of strong leaders. The coach is to be commended for his efforts to change the culture of leadership within the program.

But, will it have an impact on the team in the short run?

MacIntyre’s experiment parallels current trends in the business world to implement flat leadership or “leading from any chair.” Organizational theory experts have identified the following benefits of this style of leadership in the business world:
• The concept has increased creativity and innovation in some companies.
• A greater number of workers have a chance for their ideas to be heard.
• In turn, workers may take on greater responsibility and be more willing to be held accountable for their actions.
• Workers may show more initiative because they have a greater sense of importance.
• Cooperation, cohesiveness, and teamwork may improve when a project is successful.
These are great reasons for adopting this style of leadership.

As with any leadership style, “leadership from any chair” has its flaws. Experts have criticized the style for the following reasons:
• The concept is great for creating new products, but not so great at creating new leaders.
• The workplace becomes inefficient because there are no designated leaders to resolve disagreements or curb jealousy and backstabbing.
• At times companies have difficulty making quick or important decisions because there are no designated leaders.
• Although everyone has a voice, groupthink is often an unintended consequence.
• Communications may not always be efficient because too many people may be involved in the decision-making process.
• Mentorship does not occur in the “me first ” environment.
• Not all workers are comfortable with this style of leadership, which renders it ineffective.
These are great reasons for MacIntyre to adopt a more traditional approach for strengthening team leadership.

Will MacIntyre’s leadership experiment seal the deal for the Buffs or will it be a bust?

In a couple of weeks the team will demonstrate whether Coach Mac was able to chart a new path to effective leadership for the Buffs. Go Buffs!

CU Football Ranked Again – Number One

January 10, 2015January 19, 2015 horvath Leave a comment

Santa Claus delivered an early Christmas present to the University of Colorado football team and its fans – a number one ranking. Go Buffs!

The December 22nd issue of Forbes Magazine featured its annual ranking in “College Football’s Best And Worst Teams For The Buck 2014”. The Buffs were ranked #1 – the worst investment in college football.

Author Chris Smith stated, “Across the last three seasons, no team has spent more per football victory than Colorado, our pick for the sport’s worst team for the money. The Buffaloes have won just seven games in that time, tied with Kansas for the least of any team in our pool, while spending over $50 million. To put that into perspective, Mississippi State has built a competitive SEC program while spending $44 million across the same time period,”

To be exact, the Buff footballers spent $51.4 million over three years. Basic math shows that each of the seven wins cost $7.34 million.

Just think how it must feel to be one of the seven teams that lost to the Buffs! Thank goodness those seven teams were inept; otherwise the cost for CU to win a game would be much higher.

This notoriety is of the same ilk as the university’s #1 ranking (multiple years) as the top party school in the country. In addition, the Leeds School of Business is continually ranked as one of the country’s weakest business schools in the country and the worst in Colorado. Bummer!

The article proves that if you are good at math, it is possible to calculate virtually anything – meaningful or meaningless. While a case can be made that the Forbes calculations fall into the latter category, they point to a larger challenge for CU.

CU clearly does not have the money to build the facilities, attract the top athletes and coaches, and be competitive with the elite football teams in the PAC-12 and the country.

Will they retain the number one ranking in 2015? Probably not!

More importantly, where will they be able to find the money to play with the big boys? Smoke and mirrors? An unsuspecting sugar daddy? The state will triple its funding for the university?

A more likely option would be for CU to lower its academic standards or look the other way to become a winner. The only cost involved in that type of decision would be their reputation.

In the mean time Buff fans can only hope that Forbes and Chris Smith have somewhere else to look when the article is penned for 2015.

CU Buffs Football Team – Attendance Slips Further

December 11, 2014January 1, 2015 horvath Leave a comment

The primary goal of Division I football teams is to win and make money; however, the hard cold facts are that half the teams that play every Saturday are losers.

Over the past decade the abysmal win-loss record of the CU Buffs football team has given fans a reason to find other things to do on Saturday afternoons than support the black and gold.

The problems began a decade ago.

The Buffs finished the 2004 and 2005 seasons with 7-5 records. That is outstanding by today’s standards.

In 2004 they were 4-4 in the Big 12 and in 2005 they were 5-3. Oklahoma beat them 42-3 in the 2004 Big 12 Championships and Texas thumped them 70-3 the following year.

Many viewed these drubbings in the championships as a sign that CU was not capable of participating in the D1 football race to see which program could spend the most money.

The CU administration viewed the losses differently. They used them as justification for hiring a new coach.

In retrospect, those days of getting slaughtered in the Big 12 championships were the good old days. The Buffs football team has not had a winning season since 2005.

Since 2011, the Buffs have had four conference wins – two on the road and two at home. Details follow:

Year	Conference Record	Comments
2011	2-7 conference record	Home win over Arizona and a road win against Utah.
2012	1-8 conference record	Road win over Washington State.
2013	1-8 conference record	Home win over California.
2014	0-9 conference record	Ugh!

Unfortunately, the Buffs conference home attendance has paralleled the number of wins on the field.

Given these numbers, it’s a tough time to be the football coach or athletic director at the University of Colorado. Buff fans can only hope for a turn-around in 2015.